Smoke 'em if you can afford 'em

Here we go again. Big gov'ment is strapping on its size 13 moral-superiority clodhoppers 'n' is getting ready to start trompling all over the rights of a maligned minority 'cause it's the "right thing to do". That's right, they's raising the taxes on tobacco products. Again. When it takes effect on Wednesday, it will be the single largest federal tobacco tax increase ever. The tax on a single pack o' smokes will go from 39 cents to just over a dollar. ($1.01, to be precise.) Taxes on cigars 'n' pipe 'n' smokeless tobacco will be increased, as well. The tax on chewing tobacco, fer example, will increase from 19.5 cents to 50 cents per pound.

Course, the claim it's all fer a good cause. Ain't that always the excuse they trot out when they decide to infringe on the rights o' some minority group er the other - that it's fer the "public good"? This time, they say they're going to use the tobacco taxes to help finance a major expansion o' health insurance fer children. While that may be a good use to put their extorted funds towards, in actual practice the idea is just plain stupid.

Now, I know you're prob'ly thinking, "Stupid? Ain't that rather a harsh word to use, Random?" Well, that's as maybe. But when it's the right word, it's the right word, 'n' I ain't going to shy away from using it. It is a stupid idea. Just look at the thing logically, which, obviously, the gov'ment ain't doing. They's claiming it's a win-win situation. First off, they's raising money to help fund child care. I admit, that's a good thing. Then, they claim that it will provide further incentive fer tobacco users to quit their bad habits, which will improve their health.

Let's just leave the health "benefits" o' less tobacco use aside fer right now 'n' concentrate on the
consequences o' diminished tobacco use among the general population. The first thought that springs to mind is: less tobacco use means less tobacco purchases which means a decrease in the revenues from tobacco taxes which means less money fer child health care. That's a lose-win, the children lose but the tobacco users "win" 'cause they're "healthier". If, on the other hand, there isn't a decrease in the number o' tobacco users, er if it even increases 'cause folks want to raise that money fer the kiddies, then it's a win-lose 'cause the tobacco users get singled out fer an unfairly disproportianate tax increase. On the third hand, we have the most likely scenario, which is a lose-lose fer ever'body. There will be a decrease in the number o' tobacco users, which will mean a decrease in the tax revenue fer the kiddies, which will mean another unfair tax increase on tobacco, which will mean fewer tobacco users, which will mean a decrease in the tax revenue fer the kiddies, which will mean another unfair tax increase on tobacco, which will mean fewer tobacco users... 'n' so on.

If they want to tax someone to raise money fer child health care, tax the deep pockets, not the folks already struggling with their finances. Make the petroleum companies pay fer it. I'd be willing to bet real money that more deaths in this country can be linked, either directly er indirectly, to the manufacturing 'n' use o' petroleum products than the manufacturing 'n' use o' tobacco. Er they could go after the drug companies. They're the ones who are, probably, most responsible fer the skyrocketing cost o' healthcare in this country, anyway. Make 'em put back some o' what they've taken. If they really want to make some money 'n' a tangible differ'nce at the same time, legalize the illegal drugs 'n' tax them.

Now there's a win-win. Maybe even a win-win-win er a win-win-win-win. They'd get more money fer the younguns that way than they could ever dream o' getting from tobacco users. If drugs was legal, they could regulate their manufacture 'n' quality, which means less deaths 'n' health problems from bad drugs. It would also pull the rug out from under the drug cartels 'n' the gangs running drugs in this country. That would mean less violence, less criminals, less folks in jail, safer neighborhoods, 'n' healthier environments fer the children o' drug families.

If they insist on placing the burden on the shoulders o' the tobacco user, then I say the tobacco user's in this country should stand up 'n' make themselves heard. I don't mean standing up in shouting 'bout how unfair it is er writing letters to congressfolks er any o' that, 'cause ain't no one going to listen to 'em if they's just using words. I mean they should speak with their wallets. What I'd like to see happen is fer ever' tobacco user in the country to quit buying tobacco products fer at least six months. Turn off that tax tap 'n' see what the gov'ment does when the tobacco users say, "No, you cain't have my money!" Maybe then they'll see the light 'n' actually try something intelligent fer a change. I know, asking the gov'ment to do something intelligent is like asking a chicken to lay hard boiled eggs. I can still dream, though. Least, until they find a way to tax that, too.

Stop the Presses!

I am so proud o' my local newpaper. They have finally reared up on their hind legs 'n' shown some backbone, some leadership, some strength, some courage, some intestinal fortitude, some outright (please forgive my use o' local slang) cajones. The local paper today decided to thumb its nose at the conventional wisdome on what constitutes news 'n' how it should be reported. Forget that we got troops fighting overseas. Forget that we got personal, local, state, national, 'n' international financial crises. Forget the climate problems. Forget that we got a new President in office who seems intent on getting more done in his first month in office than most other folks have managed to get done in their first year.

Forget all that stuff. The local editors 'n' reporters have decided that the single biggest item o' news they could report in today's paper, at least in terms o' space dedicated to it (at least a quarter to a third o' the front page, with a big ol' pi'ture to boot), was a nice little piece 'bout folks getting their pi'tures taken. O' course, it weren't just any ol' pi'ture taking event. It's this new project the city has undertaken to help "beautify" a new underpass into the downtown area they's spending $26 million on to complete. What happened was, they've contracted with this group o' photographers to go 'round town fer a few months 'n' take pi'tures o' folks that they are then going to put on tiles to be used to cover panels at the entrances to the underpass.

'N' that's just how they reported it. They didn't bother wtih anything that would have taken away from the charm 'n' feel-good nature o' the story. They didn't bother to comment on the downturn in American ingenuity er the failure of American technoloy that is forcing 'em to send the photos down to Brazil 'cause America ain't got the know how ner skills to prduce tiles that would be UV-proof. Ner did they bother to question why the town elders decided that, in this time of economic downturn 'n' budget deficits, it was more important to spend this money on "make-up" instead o' using it fer infrastructure er to help the indigent er fer education er something important.

No, sir. They seem to feel that, if we just start ignoring er downplaying all the negative stuff going on, it'll all just go away. Keep it light. Keep it uplifting. That'll help sell papers 'n' make us feel better. Course, it could o' been worse. They might have gone with a celebrity update er, worst of all, a sports story.

Anyone fer Thirds?

Well, it looks they finally made it official. Maybe. Seems the powers that be decided they'd better give Oprama a second shot at the swearing in yeste'day to make sure it took. I reckon they woke up like the rest of us 'n' found that the market was still down, unemployment was still up, the troops was still out o' the country, folks was still in deep financial troubles, 'n' they wasn't no heavenly choirs singing "Hallelujah" 'n' figured that, maybe, Oprama weren't officially President yet since they messed up the oath the first time 'round. So they dragged ol' Mr. Chief Justice John Roberts out o' bed, made him dress back up in his black gown, 'n' had him try it again in the White House Map Room.

There were witnesses there, including some members o' the press, but they didn't 'low no cameras in the room, so they ain't got no real proof that what they said happened actually happened. Also, they claim that there weren't no Bible used this time. So maybe it didn't take the second time, neither, since ever'one woke up today to find that the market was still down, unemployment was still up, the troops was still out o' the country, folks was still in deep financial troubles, 'n' they wasn't no heavenly choirs singing "Hallelujah". Maybe they need to take a third run at the thing 'n' make sure they get ever' little thing right including having a Bible (I got a Gideon I can loan 'em if they's desperate) 'n' having pictures taken 'n' doing it in front o' the whole country with all the right words spoken in all the right order.

The whole thing has got me wondering if Mr. Chief Justice John Roberts got that memo that Jr. was supposed to have sent 'round 'bout how he didn't want any o' his folks pulling any shenanigans during the change-over. After all, Mr. Chief Justice John Roberts is one o' Jr.'s appointees, so maybe he's just fooling around, trying to complicate things 'n' either just make Oprama look bad er out-'n'-out invalidate his claims to office. Look fer all this to come back up when the Republicans decide to start talking impeachment after they decide enough time has passed to bring it up.

Course, none o' this stopped, er even slowed down, Oprama's acting like President. In his first day in office, he put a stop to trials at Guantanamo, claimed he was going to close the detention facility there withing a year, imposed new limits on lobbyists including banning them from giving gifts to anyone serving in the administration, froze the salaries o' White House aides making more than $100,000, met with the Joint Chiefs o' Staff 'bout changes in how to handle the campaigns in Iraq 'n' Afghanistan, presided over the White House meeting on the economy, 'n' talked by phone with leaders in the Middle East. 'N' that was just some o' the things he did.

President er not, looks like maybe, just maybe, this feller has finished cutting his bait 'n' is ready to start doing some actual fishing. I don't care so much 'bout all his fancy talking. It's his doing that I'm concerned 'bout. 'N', from where I'm sitting, his doing in one day so far has given me more hope than all his talking did in the past 12 months.

The Changing o' the Guard

Just a few quick thoughts on the inauguration 'n' speech 'fore the pundits, spin-doctors, nay-sayers, 'n' other assorted 'n' sundry "experts" ruin it for ever'one.

Firstly: Oprama seemed like an eager little beaver, didn't he. He just couldn't wait to light into the oath 'n' get it over with so he could get to officially call himself president, could he?

Secondly: Why has he got such a problem with saying that he will "faithfully" perform his duties?

Thirdly: What has he got against the brave soldiers who have fought 'n' died fer their country since the end o' the Korean war?

Fourthly: A campaign 'n' nomination acceptance speech that were compared to/paralleled President Jack's - a train trip 'n' Bible that were last used by President Lincoln - an inauguration on the day after MLK day: coincedences, smart politicking, er eerie omens/premonitions o' bad things to come?

The Fleecing o' the American Economy

First off, looks like my numbers on the election was just a bit off. Since I looked up the results, they've changed the status o' Missouri from having chosen the Arizona also-ran to "undecided", meaning they ain't finished counting all their ballots yet, so it may go to Oprahma, after all. If he does get it, that'll increase his lead in electoral votes by enough to put him up into the same numbers Slick got when he won both times, but it's still far short o' the overwhelming number of electoral votes both former Presidents Reagan 'n' Sr. got. The paper today also said that Oprahma got 52.4% o' the popular vote, vs. 46.2% fer the other side, so I weren't too far off on my numbers fer that.

Speaking o' numbers 'n' the way they can change from day to day, what 'bout what Wall Street's been doing over the past few days? There just ain't no logic to the way they's running the thing, these days. 'N' it ain't just the past few days, neither. This defiance o' logic started back months ago. Just look at the way they was acting back when they started with the whole bailout thing. Ever'body got all excited when Congress started talking 'bout their $700 billion plan to pump some life back into the financial markets. Then, when they failed to pass it on the first go, someone on Wall Street pushed the lever down 'n' tried to flush the economy. So, o' course, Congress gave in to their blackmail 'n' rushed to pass the thing on the second try. What did Wall Street do? Were they satisfied that they'd got their $700 billion ransom? No. The very next day after the bailout was passed, all you could hear on Wall Street was more flushing noises.

Then, this past week, ever'body's all excited 'n' hopeful 'bout the election 'n' the market reflected that by ending up 'round 300 points er so. Then, the next day when ever'one seemed so happy 'n' excited 'n' relieved 'bout Oprahama's win, the market falls over 400 points, followed by another 400+ point fall the next day. Then, amid reports that the unemployment rate is the worst it's been in something like 14 years, the market goes back up. It goes down when there's good news 'n' up when there's bad. What's it going to take to get these fellers to make up their minds? They need to pick a direction to go 'n' then just go there.

I think it's 'bout time we come up with a new term fer this kind o' market shenanigans. We've all heard 'bout the "Bear" 'n' the "Bull" markets, when the general trend is either up er down. So what do we call a market when the trend is up 'n' down from one day to the next? I think I've come up with a pretty good one. Let's call it the "Sheep" market, 'cause that's the way they're acting. They just all bunch up together, follow 'long behind whoever moves first, even if it's right over a cliff, 'n' shy at the least little thing. Looks like the lions o' Wall Street have turned into nothing but lambs.

Oprahma's saying this is the greatest economic challenge we've faced in a lifetime. He also said he's going to defer to President Jr. 'n' his cronies until Jan. 20, but once he's officially in office he's going to jump on it with both feet. Let's hope he can knock some sense into the heads o' the folks on Wall Street. He's talking 'bout even more "stimulus packages", but they ain't shown much use it getting things back in order so far. Personally, I think he should just walk out onto the trading floor on his first day 'n' start swinging a 2 by 4 'round. In my experience, folks respond a lot more quickly 'n' decisively to a good hunk o' lumber than they do to a little piece o' paper.

If we're lucky, Oprahma'll turn out to be a sheep dog er a leader sheep that can get those folks in line 'n' herd er lead 'em where they need to go. I just hope he don't become some form o' Judas goat er sacrificial lamb. I guess we'll just have to wait 'n' see how this all plays out, though.

The United? States of America

As I was watching the election returns on NBC Tuesday night, I noticed something as they was declaring which states' majorities voter fer Oprahma 'n' which states' majorities voted fer the Arizona also-ran. What I noticed was the way the reds 'n' the blues was dividing themselves up. If you start at the Canadian border 'round 'bout Montana 'n' head due south, you notice ever'thing's a bright shade o' red, 'cept fer a little blue lake in the middle of it 'round 'bout Colorado 'n' New Mexico. Once you hit the Mexican border, make a 90 degree turn 'n' head due east. You'll keep seeing red 'til you run out o' land 'n' hit the Atlantic. Add Alaska into the mix, 'n' that's what the Arizona also-ran won: a big chunk o' the west, the western half o' the mid-west, 'n' the south, 'cept fer Florida which is no surprise since they's all just displaced New Yorkers.

The next thing I noticed was when Oprahma stood up to give his acceptance speech. Right up front he said, "...we have never been a collection of Red States and Blue States: we are, and always will be, the United States of America." That struck me at the time, 'cause all I could think was, "United? Ain't you seen that map, yet? You may have the minds 'n' the strong backs o' the northeast, northen middle states 'n' the west coast, but looks like the heart 'n' stomach o' this country still belongs to the other side."

So I decided to get out my copy of Excel 'n' play 'round with a few o' the numbers. Now, let me point out a couple o' things right off the bat, here. First off, this ain't meant to be in no way a slam on Mr. Oprahma. The man's got my, tentative, respect 'n' support. He won the thing fair 'n' square. (Er, at least as fair 'n' square as you can win an election in America these days.) I ain't trying to take nothing away from him. Secondly, this is just a little home grown analyzing. I ain't 'n' don't claim to be no kind of an expert on politics, statistics, analysis, er any o' that other stuff 'n' am generally fairly leary of anyone else who tries to prove anything by showing me a bunch o' numbers they been playing 'round with.

So, having said that, here's some o' the things I come up with: Firstly, Oprahma won the election with 364 electoral votes to 174 fer the Arizona also-ran out of a total of 538 possible. That's a differ'nce of 190. Looked at another way, that's 68% vs. 32% - better than two-thirds o' the electoral votes. That looks pretty impressive, but only if you compare it to the two presidential elections before the more recent one, when President Jr. was running. He won his first time by only 5 electoral votes 'n' the second time by only 15. If we go back past that, they ain't been another Presidential contest as close as this since former President Carter beat former President Ford way back in 1976 by only 57 electoral votes. That means that all the elections since then, with the exception o' President Jr.'s two wins, were bigger blowouts.

Still, a two to one majority of electoral votes is pretty impressive. But that's the electoral votes. When we get down to real folks, it don't look quite as impressive. 'Cording to the numbers I've found, Oprahma won only 29, er 57%, o' the states (plus the D.C. area) to 22 states, er 43%, on the other side. That's quite a bit less than a two-thirds majority in terms o' state-by-state counts. He just happened to pick up more o' the big ticket states. If we look at it by population, then things get even closer. According to statistics fer the, projected, populations o' the United States fer 2007, Oprahma won only 53% o' the vote by population vs. 46% fer the opposition.

Now, like I said, this is just a home grown analysis 'n' I ain't no professional in the field, which means I ain't got the fancy numbers available to me that other folks have, so I cain't speak to how any state's registered voters reflect the thinking of a state's population as a whole. But 53% vs. 46% looks like a lot less unity among folks than the electoral votes might lead us to believe.

Looks like Oprahma may not be the great healer 'n' unifier folks was hoping he'd be. Not yet, at any rate. He's still got eight years to work on it, though. 'N' he seems to realize it. He said he would listen to us, especially when we disagree. Good thing he's got more ears than the rest of us, 'cause with, what looks like, 46% o' the population not too sure 'bout what he's had to say so far, I'd say he's got a lot o' listening heading his way.

Say Hello to the Next Eight Years

America woke up yeste'day morning 'n' breathed a huge sigh o' relief that the long, dark nightmare was finally over. I ain't talking 'bout the nightmare o' President Jr.'s stint in office. I ain't talking 'bout the nightmare o' the financial crisis. I ain't even talking 'bout the nightmare that we might have to put up with four more years o' Republican hi-jinks. I'm talking 'bout the year-long nightmare o' name calling, mud slinging, muck raking, back stabbing, dirty tricks, voting fraud, questionable financing, 'n' out 'n' out lying that makes American voting the greatest kind o' Democracy in the world.

That's right. We done went 'n' elected ourselves a new President. 'N' not just any new President at that. No sir. We went 'n' elected a President that is not only the first o' his kind in American history, but, quite possibly, the first o' his kind in the world. Yes, sir, we got us our very first Siamese twin fer President. You know who I'm talking 'bout: President-elect Oprahma - half female entertainer 'n' half male politician.

So, not only has he got to deal with the problems o' being the first-of-his-kind American President 'n' the problems with the economy facing him when he takes office 'n' the problems facing America abroad 'n' the problems o' dealing with terrorism 'n' drugs 'n' illegal immigration 'n' raising two young girls in the public spotlight 'n' trying to house train a new puppy without damaging anything in the Lincoln bedroom, now he has to figure out how to juggle running a media empire, hosting a top TV show, 'n' being the leader o' the free world, as well. Good thing he's got two heads 'n' four hands, 'cause he's gonna need all of 'em.

Now, I know y'all want to just sit back, take a deep breath, let the past year slide quietly into the history books, 'n' gather your strength over the next two months so you can start griping 'bout what a lousy job the new guys doing soon as he takes office, but I got one more bit o' campaign information to share with you. 'N' this ain't 'bout the campaign that just ended, but the one we get to look forward to in another three years er so. Don't worry, it'll be quick 'n' painless.
All I want to say is, let's just skip the whole thing next time 'round. I ain't no supporter of Oprahma's, but I predicted this result way back last year when I first heard he'd th'owed his hat into the ring. I said to myself at the time, "Well, there's your next President." 'N' I was right. In fact, I been right 'bout ever' President since Carter, when I first started paying attention to these kinds o' things. I may not know much 'bout "cultural shifts" er "pendulum swings" er even politics in general, but I can smell the next President coming at least three months 'fore the conventions even get under way.

So, take the hint from me 'n' don't even worry 'bout next time 'round just yet. We didn't just elect the President fer the next four years: we just elected the President fer the next eight years. That's right. I'm already predicting an Oprahma win in 2012. All he's got to do is live through the next four years, 'n', given American history, that may be the toughest job of all he'll have to face.